1 John 2:19 Illustrated

Jon Harris and I do not see eye to eye on everything.  He’s very Baptist.  I’m very Anglican.  And he is one of the few that can make me look moderate at times.  Nonetheless I think he hit it out of the park with his analysis of “These Evangelical Women Are Abandoning Trump and the Church.”

I am not going to rehash either his video nor the article.  But several thoughts came to mind as I watched and then read:

1. If someone would leave a church over members voting for Trump, that says more about that one’s priorities and commitment to the church than about those who vote for Trump.  People voting in self-defense for Trump against the Democrats and Hillary was not wrong.  And even if you disagree, it is not grounds for leaving a church. 

And yes, I am also talking about Jemar Tisby and other whining Woke Churchers who have oh-so lamented evangelicals voting for Trump.  They need to grow up.  Better yet, they need to repent of smearing millions of Christians who voted to stop or at least slow this country’s descent into totalitarian evil.

2. Evangelical churches are not blameless for young evangelicals leaving.  And the article actually does have some valid criticisms.  I’ve railed against The Evangelical Church of What’s Happening Now, skinny jeans and all.  Many evangelical pastors probably think catechesis is a disease.  There has been too much seeker sensitive pablum and not enough making disciples.  And, yes, some churches are among the many institutions that have enabled abuse.

But the women mentioned in the article need to look in the mirror more and blame their past churches less.  I will get to that.  Hey, I’ve had bad experiences in evangelical churches, too.  I let God use that to strengthen me in the faith instead of the opposite.

3. Bad generations happen even when leadership is excellent.  Joshua was one of the best leaders in the Bible, yet after he died, “there arose another generation after them, which knew not the LORD, nor yet the works which he had done for Israel.  And the children of Israel did evil in the sight of the Lord.” (Judges 2: 10,11)

Parents and churches are a vitally important influence on children.  But man is evil, and evil generations can and do arise even when led well.

And, yes, I think this generation that is leaving the church and attacking America is an evil generation.  They are not to be coddled or accommodated.  The church is to call them repentance.  The church should not change to appease them.

4. Finally, and most importantly, there is 1 John 2:19:

They went out from us, but they were not of us; for if they had been of us, they would have continued with us. But they went out, that it might become plain that they all are not of us. (ESV)

This verse kept coming to mind again and again as I watched Harris’ video and read the article.  If someone goes to work for a pro-abortion organization or for the likes of Elizabeth Warren, she is evil.  She was not a faithful Christian in the first place.  The church is better off without her.  Yes, I said it. (* But do see below.)

Yes, the church should mourn that any, especially those once among the church, so choose to run after evil.  And the church should always look to see if it is doing anything amiss.  But at the same time a church should repel such evil.   A faith that doesn’t offend anyone is not The Faith.  Furthermore . . .

…You are to deliver [such people] to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that [their] spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.

In no way should they be told that their apostasy is acceptable or justified.  They should also be told they are welcome to return if they repent.

But they left their churches and descended into such evil because they are evil.  Not because church people voted for Trump. 

----

* Please note that, like the article and video, I am talking about people who once were active in somewhat orthodox churches and once claimed to be Christians.  We should not expect those never or rarely in the church to exercise Christian discernment and should be much more gentle and patient with them.  I once was pro-abortion, but I repented of that and of much more thanks to God and to patient Christians who gently taught me the truth.

Cardinal Cupich Doesn’t Like You Distracting Bigots

Cardinal Blase Cupich is not happy with you bigots who think Pope Francis should resign or, at the very least, think Francis’ promotion of apostate predators and wolves should be thoroughly investigated.

“The pope knows we have a bigger agenda. We have to speak about the environment, about the poor, we have to reach out to people who are marginalized in society. We cannot be distracted at this moment,” Cupich said.

Yes, the Gospel, the purity of the church, and protecting the young are such annoying distractions from lib/left political activism.  And Vigano’s testimony is a really bad distraction:

Cupich described the contents of Archbishop Carlos Maria Viganò’s 11-page testimony, published Aug. 25, as a “rabbit hole” that he does not think the Church should be going down.

Yes, the church should ignore Pope Francis’ rehabilitation of Uncle Ted McCarrick and the appointment of Uncle Ted’s libchurch allies as Cardinals.  Nothing to see here!

And Cupich knows the real reason I and others dislike Francis:

“Quite frankly, they also don’t like him because he’s a Latino,” said Cupich. Pope Francis was born in Buenos Aires, Argentina, to parents of Italian descent.

But don’t let that detail keep you from playing the race card, Cardinal.

Now there is a reason I mock Cupich’s statements other than that there are such easy targets.  Backed by the predatory Uncle Ted, this is the sort of libchurcher with which Francis has stacked the College of Cardinals. Therefore, if we are to have a robustly orthodox Pope in our lifetimes, it is not enough that Francis resign. The likes of Cupich, Wuerl etc. must be shown the door as well. 

But I have serious doubts that even Francis will resign.  I might get to that another time.

Gavin Ashenden on the Philip North Affair

Studies and other responsibilities continue to restrain my blogging.  But I must direct your attention to two excellent posts on the Philip North withdrawal and its aftermath from Rev. Dr. Gavin Ashenden, former Chaplain to the Queen.  The Ashes of Cranmer has graciously hosted both posts here and here.

A segment from the second post stands out.  I will excerpt it and run:

The three-card trick that Professor Percy [The Dean of Christ Church Oxford who led the attack on North] and his cultural fellow-travellers play is to refuse to exclude anyone except those who don’t agree with them. You only get to be included in the equality stakes once you have accepted their moral and political presuppositions. So, of course, they do actually discriminate between anyone who shares their basic world view and those who don’t.

They pretend they are relativists by claiming that all views are equally legitimate, but become absolutists if you challenge their relativism. In other words, their ideas of equality and relativism are actually practised by placing their value above those who disagree with them, and discriminating against anyone who has the audacity and moral turpitude to dissent.

Meanwhile, they claim the higher moral ground by pretending to be something that they are not – outlawing discrimination while practising it.

This is, of course, hypocrisy – that is, saying one thing while doing another.

What happens when the hypocrisy is challenged, as with the attempt to include a bishop who embodies an older more traditional view in an inclusive non-discriminatory Church?

Well, we just saw what happens, haven’t we?

And, yes, Justin Welby is still silent about it.

Fake Hate Cake

When the “FAG” cake story came out last month, I smelled yet another fake hate hoax.  But I was actually prudent and decided to let more facts come out before opining.

And sure enough, it has been exposed as yet another fake hate hoax.  Libchurch perp Pastor Jordan Brown has somewhat apologized and confessed Whole Foods did “nothing wrong.”

I think this a good time to remind readers of one of my Laws of Political Life . . . . Well, I haven’t actually written down such.  But if I did, one of them would be . . .

Leftists lie.

Yes, there are noble exceptions.  Alan Dershowitz and Dennis Kucinich come to mind.  But lying is in the DNA of Leftism.  Various mutations of Leftism put total victory over political opponents above life, liberty, and truth.  Look at the millions upon millions that Communism has killed and enslaved.  If you can do that or support that or even downplay that and sleep at night, then lying comes easy.

And from my decades of observing politics I can assure you Leftists lie a lot.  (Learning this has been a shock at times for me.) If you recognize that if a Leftist has his mouth open, he is probably eating or lying, it will greatly assist your understanding of what really is going on.

And we are seeing that demonstrated time and time again in the epidemic of fake hate hoaxes.

----

By the way, include libchurch leaders like Jordan Brown in that.  Libchurch leaders lie, too.  Those who present themselves as Christians while knowingly denying the basics of the Faith have a seared conscience and serious demonstrated problems in dealing with truth.

And if you think I’m harsh, read what St. Paul wrote.

Stayin’ on Hillary!

I think I have mentioned here that once you get significantly left of center in politics, you are in idolatrous territory.  For the Left worships the Holy State, looking to it to meet all our needs and casting our God-given freedoms at its feet.  And there is often the cult of personality to boot.  See the Obama worship of 2008 and the cult of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela for recent examples.

To any who may foolishly doubt me on the idolatry of the Left, I present to you Stayin’ on Hillary!

A women’s chorus called Voices from the Heart replaced the name “Jesus” with “Hillary” at a campaign rally in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, on Saturday.

The chorus was singing the old gospel song “Woke Up This Morning (With My Mind On Jesus),” but chose to replace Jesus’ name with Hillary’s.

The video shows the choir singing,

Woke up this mornin’ with my mind, stayin’ on Hillary

Woke up this mornin’ with my mind, stayin’ on Hillary

Hallelu, Hallelu, Hallelu, Hallelu, Hallelujah!

Hallelujah!  Or perhaps I should say Halleluhillary!

Catholics Have Reason to Be Concerned About the Synod on the Family

Although not papist myself, I’ve long thought I have more in common with orthodox Romans than with Liberal “mainline” Protestants – much more.  And I note and share conservative Catholic concern about Pope Francis’ Synod on the Family.

In the next three weeks, I fully expect the leadership of my own One Holy and Apostolic Catholic Church to fall into apostasy, at the conclusion of the Synod on the Family that begins today in Rome. This is the outcome Pope Francis has shaped over the entirety of his pontificate, and particularly with his recent appointments. An event like this —heresy promulgated by the Pope and his bishops — is believed by most Catholics to be impossible. But they should be prepared for it anyway. This is not an ordinary religious conference, but one to be dreaded.

My prediction is that, after much fixing and machinations by its leaders, the Synod on the Family will declare that the Holy Spirit led them to a new understanding of the truth. The Synod’s leaders will adopt the position that those living in second marriages, irrespective of the status of their first marriage, should be admitted to Holy Communion. This is commonly called the “Kasper proposal” after its author, the German Cardinal Walter Kasper. The Synod will likely leave the details of a “penitential period of reflection” for these souls up to local bishops and parish priests The leading bishops will assure critics that in fact no doctrine has been changed, only a discipline — even if these will make no sense when considered together.

Certain theologians will cheer this as a radical break. They will declare this change of discipline to be what the critics alleged all along: a rupture within the tradition of the church, a change in doctrine. They will say that this glorious event proves the church is capable not only of developing its doctrines, but also of evolving them into something new, even something that contradicts the old. Those who had made themselves enemies of papal authority for decades will become a new kind of ultramontanist. The papacy that had been the final guardian of the faith will now become an ongoing oracle, dispensing new gospel teachings that our Lord and the Apostles missed.

The church’s teachings on contraception, homosexuality, and pre-marital sex must all be subjected to this evolution, in light of what we know about how people actually live. How they ought to live is a moot question.

That is alarmist perhaps.  But after watching Francis, I think it not unrealistic.

Two matters about Synod that should concern (And trust me that this is for starters.):

1. Francis’ insistence that bishops should be able to keep their interventions in Synod secret, which of course greatly undermines accountability.  There has already been a notorious example of this from Synod:

The actual interventions that take place on the synod floor are not made available to the public, by the will of the Holy Father. However, Archbishop Gadecki heroically took notes on the interventions made by the synod fathers, and actually made them public on his blog here. They were quickly taken down at the behest of Cardinal Baldisseri. Fortunately, copies of these interventions were saved and thanks to the work of Archbishop Gadecki, we know what kind of evil is taking place behind closed doors. Case in point, one intervention made by Cardinal Lacunza Maestrojuan suggested that the church should return to the Law of Moses on the matter of divorce and remarriage, which naturally implies the words of Christ on this matter should be abandoned.

Rorate Caeli, which is following Synod closely, has provided more detail on this silencing.

The Venerable Fr. John Hunwicke notes and notes well that this secrecy of Synod is the will of Francis and is completely out of line with scripture and tradition and with reason for that matter:

A bishop is not a distinguished individual; he is episcopus in et cum Ecclesia sua. Episcopacy is not a personal fashion accessory. I can think of few things more disgracefully clericalist, more ecclesiologically corrupt, than bishops meeting privately "in a protected space" in which they believe themselves free to stitch together something which might not be according to the traditam per Apostolos revelationem seu fidei depositum; and to do this without any element of the discipline and responsibility which comes from it being publicly known what each has said. Have their diocesan priests, deacons, and layfolk no rights whatsoever? Is Episcopacy simply a matter of lording it over the flock of Christ (I Peter 5:3) without oneself being answerable to the plebs sancta Dei? I am reminded of what an English poet called Kipling once said to an English Press Baron called Beaverbrook: "Power without responsibility - the prerogative of the harlot throughout the ages".

Fr. Hunwicke’s entire post on this matter merits reading.

2.  Pope Francis is more than willing to rig Synod.

Some has said that there is no way the conservative bishops attending Synod will allow serious error to come out of it.  (Which begs the question of how Francis got elected Pope, but anyway.) The problem is Francis is not above rigging matters, not at all.  Heck, he reminds me of Harry Reid.

At the end of 2014, there was a major controversy when the Holy Father allowed from various controversial paragraphs to remain in the 2014 Relatio Synodi document, to be used as a basis for the 2015 synod (in a document called Instrumentum Laboris), even though they didn’t receive the required two-thirds vote. To make matters worse, when those controversial paragraphs, which include the Kasper Proposal, were questioned by some synod fathers this week, they were told by Cardinal Baldisseri: “Well, if you want to get them out, it will require a two-thirds vote”! To be clear, this means that instead of needing a two-thirds vote to include paragraphs in the document, it will instead require a two-thirds vote to remove problematic language.

This demonstrates the Holy Father is allowing for the ramming of the Kasper Proposal down the throats of the Synod fathers, whether they like it or not.

Again, Rorate Caeli is noting, in some detail, the rigging of the Synod on the Family.

More can be said.  But methinks those Catholics not alarmed about the direction of Synod underestimate the perfidy of this Pope and of his allies.

The Problem with “Dialogue”

Eric Sammons over at OnePeterFive (Why did I not hear of this site before yesterday?) has posted an excellent article on the problems with dialogue with libchurchers (my word, not his).  His summary of the process of dialogue reflects very well what I’ve seen in the Anglican Communion and in mainline Protestant denominations:

---

The Teaser:  Some fringe radical theologian, or perhaps even a bishop, proposes a new teaching/practice contrary to Catholic Tradition.

The Trouble: Progressives come around to embrace the idea, and begin to promote it more and more vigorously. Faithful Catholics, on the other hand, resist the proposal, noting its conflict with perennial Church teaching/practice.

The “Muddle”: Progressives, as well as their unwitting lackeys among conservative Catholics, call for “dialogue.”

The Triumph: Progressives continue calling for dialogue ad infinitum until the progressive proposal is accepted either de jure or de facto. (Sorry, 60’s progressives – forgot the trigger warning before all that Latin).

The Kicker: Reset to a new “normal” before beginning the process all over again for the next, more radical, issue.

---

Too true.  Do read his whole straight-spoken yet thoughtful article for more.

I have long distrusted “dialogue” as a sham, a tactic libchurchers use to browbeat traditionalists until they get their way.  Then the matter is settled, of course.  “Dialogue” seems to always win with liberal victory over Biblical truth and morality.  And that, in fact, is the plan and only acceptable outcome for most libchurchers who clamor for dialogue.

And in “dialogue,” libchurchers usually deny or distort what God has clearly said in His Word.  Heck, the key words in the first serpentine dialogue were “Did God actually say . . .?”  As Eve found out the hard way, dialogue with liars is pointless and dangerous.

Better if Eve had said, “Shut up, snake.” And best we follow the example of the Fathers and put lying heretics and apostates in their place instead of “dialoguing” with them.  For “dialogue” with lies only serves to add legitimacy to lies and liars.

----

Please note that cutting off false teachers and clergy is what is called for.  Humble sincere seekers and new converts (or those who later in life decide to get more serious about their faith) are virtually all little heretics in some fashion, as I was, until they undergo patient orthodox Biblical instruction.  Gentle, loving but persistent teaching and discussion with them is a vital part of good evangelism and catechism.

Dear Francis, About That White House Visit…

Readers may have noticed that Francis is not my favorite pope, but I have some friendly advice for him and his handlers anyway.  Severely restrict photo ops during that coming visit to the White House.

A pro-abortion nun, the first openly gay Episcopal bishop, and at least two openly gay Catholic activists will be among the thousands greeting Pope Francis at the White House next week, thanks to decisions by the Obama administration.

LifeSiteNews has confirmed that Mateo Williamson, a biological woman who identifies as a man, and former co-chairman of the Transgender Caucus for Dignity USA, received an invitation to the White House when Pope Francis visits next week. Williamson declined to speak with LifeSiteNews about the invitation, instead recommending invitation organizer Vivian Taylor to LifeSiteNews.

Taylor is the executive director of the national LGBT advocacy arm of the Episcopal church, and a biological male.

CruxNow reports that retired Episcopal bishop Gene Robinson, currently a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress, will also attend . . .

Libs in and out of the Church of Rome have been very eager to enlist Pope Francis in their causes.  So if he is not careful, the White House visit will be thus exploited, one of the methods being photos with him smiling beside the likes of heretic Gene Robinson, pro-abortion nuns, and Lord knows who else.  Libs will surely spin any said photos and anything else they can grasp to say Francis is on their side (which he may be in some cases).

And, deserved or not, the Pope will get a lot of grief from the photographed appearance of his support for - or least acceptance of - Gene Robinson and whoever else manages to slither up next to him.  (And some of the grief may come from me.)

So I suspect this White House visit is a trap.  And with Francis being sloppy, to put it nicely, with his off-the-cuff comments and conduct, he may fall right into it.

Pope Francis’ Archbishop of Chicago Runs Interference for Planned Parenthood

Remember Joseph Cardinal Bernardin of Chicago and his “Seamless Garment” argument?  By in effect trivializing abortion by saying real protection of life includes any number of pet liberal causes, he did more than any Mainline Libchurcher to undercut Christian opposition to abortion.  He distracted from the presenting issue of abortion and gave excuses to pro-abortion Roman Catholic politicians by allowing them to say they are pro-life in any number of areas – they really are - while being “personally opposed” to but reluctantly “pro-choice” on abortion (Wink, wink).

I do not presume to say that was Bernardin’s intent, although I have my suspicions, but it sure was the effect of his sophistry.

Well, the latest Archbishop of Chicago, Blasé Cupich is following a similar path:

While commerce in the remains of defenseless children is particularly repulsive, we should be no less appalled by the indifference toward the thousands of people who die daily for lack of decent medical care; who are denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism; who suffer in hunger, joblessness and want; who pay the price of violence in gun-saturated neighborhoods; or who are executed by the state in the name of justice.

Instead of bringing focus on the evil of Planned Parenthood, he distracts with phony lefty outrages.  Who today is really “denied rights by a broken immigration system and by racism”? Very few, and even fewer (i. e. close to zero) are dismembered and sold off for parts by such.  Is hunger really comparable to being torn apart?  Is executing the worst of criminals really comparable to murdering the innocent then making merchandise with their bodies?

With his lefty parade of faux victims, Archbishop Blasé is willfully downplaying and distracting from the murderous outrages of Planned Parenthood.

And Pope Francis shares the blame for this shameful charade. 

For he appointed Cupich as Archbishop of Chicago in 2014.  And that even after Cupich did this as Bishop of Spokane in 2011:

Cupich discouraged priests and seminarians in his diocese from participating in demonstrations in front of Planned Parenthood clinics or supporting 40 Days for Life, a pro-life movement that conducts vigils at abortion clinics.

Cupich already had a record of being soft, Blasé, if you will, on baby killing and on the foremost practitioners of baby butchering, Planned Parenthood.  He already had a record of running interference for Planned Parenthood.

But Pope Francis appointed him anyway.

Libchurchers Praise Planned Parenthood as “Doing God’s Work”

This is why there needs to be a Hell.

Those “church” leaders who blaspheme Jesus’ name to praise Planned Parenthood as they butcher babies will, if there is no heartfelt repentance, meet the same fate as those mainline German “Christians” who supported the Nazis as they slaughtered Jews.

Anathema!

The Wisdom of St. Ignatius of Antioch

Tonight is the Eve of the Feast of St. Ignatius of Antioch.  He was the Bishop of Antioch in the early 2^nd Century and, during an intense persecution of Christians in that city, was condemned to death by wild beasts, to be executed at Rome.

And we do not know much else about him except from a number of letters he wrote to churches as he was being taken to his sentence.

But what letters they are!  Ignatius’ heart and pugnaciously joyful personality shine through these letters.  Impending martyrdom did not discourage him but emboldened him.  He even looked forward with eagerness to “get to God” through his grisly martyrdom in the Coliseum.

And his letters are full of wisdom, particularly in how churches should relate to their leaders.  He also took aim at heresies, particularly Docetism.

I wish to conclude by quoting a statement of his about heresies in his Letter to the Trallians.

[Heretics] mingle Jesus Christ with their teachings just to gain your confidence under false pretenses.  It is as if they were giving a deadly poison mixed with honey and wine, with the result that the unsuspecting victim gladly accepts it and drinks down death with fatal pleasure.

And so it remains today.  The inventors of just about every false religion and heresy, even if mad and blind, still realize that the person of Jesus Christ is important and attractive.  Even in their delusions, they are compelled to answer his question, “Who do you say that I am?”  So they include in their falsehoods what I call a “token Jesus.”  They give lip service to Jesus to add attractiveness and legitimacy to their false religion.  But it is not the real Jesus Christ, but a supposed Jesus who is not the Son of God, the King of kings and Lord of lords.  And, yes, the Jesus of “mainline” libchurchers is such a token Jesus.

Which St. Ignatius so well warned against some 1900 years ago.  God’s Holy Church does well to remember his courage and wisdom and to thank the Lord for his teaching and godly example.

OUTRAGE: Presbyterian Agency Denies Christians Are Persecuted

It never fails.  Several times a year, the mainline Presbyterian “Church” does something that makes me glad I left that putrid denomination decades ago.  But the latest act is outrageous even by Presbyterian standards.  I am at a lack for polite words, so I’ll get right to it.

In response to a resolution addressing worldwide persecution of Christians, the Presbyterian Mission (HA!) Agency Board (PCUSA) responded thus:

The Church is called to prayer for those who suffer due to their faith. The Presbyterian Mission Agency reminds commissioners and advisory delegates the suffering of the church in the world is not only due to “persecution”, but there are many factors involved. These include geopolitical and economic factors. The General Assembly should consider all the factors that result in and contribute to sectarian violence. Use of the word “persecuted” mischaracterizes the nature of the maltreatment of Christians in the world, and in many cases would be an unhelpful exaggeration.

So Christians aren’t really persecuted, and saying they are is often “an unhelpful exaggeration”?  To get an idea what an outrageous statement this is, go to Open Doors and look around for a few minutes if you have the stomach to handle it.  For a “church” to deny that Christians are being persecuted in the world is vile.  It is not only unchristian; it is inhuman.

The church has long honored its martyrs and suffering confessors, both past and present.  For a Presbyterian agency to deny the nature of their suffering today . . . . Oh that’s right.  The PCUSA is no longer part of God’s Holy Church.  It proved that decades ago.

Tools

Two stories have come out in recent days that confirm that lefty “non-partisan” “think” tanks and the “mainstream” “news” media are willing tools of the Obama Administration.

First, a former Think Progress blogger has come out and said the Center of American Progress was very upset with him for an article critical of Obama’s Afghanistan policy.  For it created “daylight” between the CAP and Obama.  Supporting the Dear Leader is more important than actual thinking, don’tcha know.

Second, Sharyl Attkisson has resigned from CBS News.  The reasons are pretty much an open secret.  She had the temerity to do actual investigative reporting of the Obama Administration, particularly on Fast and Furious and on Benghazi.  And investigative reporting is not so appreciated at CBS now that the Dear Leader gloriously rules.  In fact, her stories dropped by about two-thirds in making the CBS Evening Propaganda News since Obama began his reign.

And, sure enough, one source has said, “It’s no secret that Sharyl has been unhappy about CBS’s lack of interest in investigative reporting, especially when it comes to stories about the Obama administration.”

She is working on a book now.  The tentative title? Stonewalled: One Reporter’s Fight for Truth in Obama’s Washington. 

I might have to buy that one.

But do not trust lib/left think tanks or the “mainstream” “news” media if you want anything approximating the truth about the Obama Administration.  Tools are not that interested in the truth.

Straining at Gnats and Swallowing Camels

One of the many qualities shared by both political and religious liberals is their marvelous ability to strain at gnats and swallow camels.  Both can make such a big deal about the trivial but commit the most egregious outrages even as they so do.

Christopher Johnson illustrates this well.

The governing body of United Church of Christ congregations in the Mid-Atlantic is proposing that its members boycott Washington Redskins games and shun products bearing the team’s logo until the team changes its name and mascot. 

Of course, those with the least familiarity with the United Church of Christ know they are a profoundly apostate denomination that jettisoned the basics of the faith decades ago.  But boycotting the Redskins is oh-so-important. 

Now this Texan hates the Washington Redskins.  And just the thought of the 49ers or of the Steelers has me reaching for my imprecatory psalms.  But at least I have some sense of what’s important to the Christian faith.

Then there is this from Obama’s Feds:

For more than three decades the predominantly Aleut fishing community of King Cove has been fighting to build a one-lane,gravel track connecting the Cove to the nearby hamlet of Cold Bay. What they have gotten is 30 years of flat-out federal refusals or stall tactics. 

Cove residents say a road is necessary so they can reach an all-weather airport in Cold Bay that will transport them to Anchorage, about 625 miles away, for medical treatment. They say that in emergency situations, it’s a matter of life and death. 

Late last year, though, the Department of Interior announced it was rejecting plans for a proposed land swap that would allow the road to be built. The Dec. 23 decision cited the negative environmental impact on grizzly bears, caribou and water fowl like the Pacific black brant. . . .

According to local Aleutian elders, 19 people have died since 1980 as a result of the impossible-to-navigate weather conditions during emergency evacuations.

During an August visit to Alaska, Jewell was told that building a road that connects King Cove and Cold Bay was vital. But in December, Jewell rejected the road saying it would jeopardize waterfowl in the refuge.

“She stood up in the gymnasium and told those kids, ‘I’ve listened to your stories, now I have to listen to the animals,” Democratic state Rep. Bob Herron told a local television station. “You could have heard a pin drop in that gymnasium.”

The land required for the road is less than 1 percent of the total refuge.

Now I love waterfowl, too.  And God help those I catch trespassing on my duck pond.  But I am not going to endanger or even kill people to defend my ducks.

Now the liberal propensity to strain at gnats and swallow camels at least provides some amusement.  For example, I love this comment at the above link:

If the gravel road ended at an abortion clinic the Army Corps of Engineers would be air lifting bulldozers at near supersonic speed.

 Too true.  Yes, said propensity can be amusing . . . until people get hurt.